![](/static/253f0d9/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/8f2046ae-5d2e-495f-b467-f7b14ccb4152.png)
I thought so too, hence my earlier cheap labour assumption. I was hoping exaggerating the opposite would bait them into correcting me (obviously still justified á la “At least they had an income”), but it doesn’t seem like they fell for it. Still, those euphemisms and weasel words didn’t quite scream “honest and forthcoming” to me.
In this case, the law being freedom of speech, the protection being to say what they want and the binding being to prohibit others from curtailing that. Naturally, the push for inclusive language is part of a movement to curtail that freedom and needs to be reversed and pushed back against.